United States v. De Betham, 72-2732.
| Decision Date | 12 February 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 72-2732.,72-2732. |
| Citation | 470 F.2d 1367 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Bruce Eugene De BETHAM, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Charles M. Sevilla, San Diego, Cal., for defendant-appellant.
James Meyers, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Shelby R. Gott, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Stephen G. Nelson, Catherine A. Chandler, Asst. U. S. Attys., Harry D. Steward, U. S. Atty., San Diego, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before CHAMBERS and KILKENNY, Circuit Judges, and TAYLOR,* District Judge.
After waiver of a jury trial, appellant was convicted by the court of violation of 21 U.S.C. § 844 possession of heroin. He appeals from the judgment of conviction and sentence. We affirm.
The sole issue before us is whether the trial judge committed error in failing to receive beneficial polygraphic1 evidence offered by appellant.
In support of his contention, appellant directs our attention to volume after volume of testimony, produced at the preliminary hearing, pointing to the reliability of this type evidence. During the four day hearing, the appellant called a substantial number of experts qualified in the field of polygraphy and in the related fields of psychology, psychiatry and physiology. Simply stated, the evidence at the hearing vigorously supports the accuracy of polygraphic evidence. In the trial on the merits, the testimony of appellant was in direct conflict with that of the officers on the principal issues.
Despite the strong showing made by appellant, we are not ready to say that the trial judge abused his discretion in rejecting the offer. United States v. Salazar-Gaeta, 447 F.2d 468, 469 (CA9 1971); United States v. Sadrzadeh, 440 F.2d 389, 390 (CA9 1971); Frye v. United States, 54 App.D.C. 46, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (1923).
Moreover, our analysis of the record convinces us that the trial judge did not believe appellant in those instances where his testimony conflicted with that of the government witnesses. In these circumstances the error, if any, in rejecting the evidence would be harmless under Rule 52(a), FRCrimP. We do not hold that polygraphic evidence is never admissible.
Judgment affirmed.
* The Honorable Fred M. Taylor, Senior District Judge for the District of Idaho, sitting by designation.
1 Lie detection.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Brown
...in Lindsey v. United States, 237 F.2d 893 (9th Cir.1956), and it has consistently applied it in polygraph cases. In United States v. DeBetham, 470 F.2d 1367 (9th Cir.1972), cert. den. 412 U.S. 907, 93 S.Ct. 2299, 36 L.Ed.2d 972 (1973), the defendant sought to introduce exculpatory polygraph......
-
State v. Walker
..., 179 F.Supp. 278, 280 (S.D.N.Y. 1959) ); see also United States v. DeBetham , 348 F.Supp. 1377, 1390-91 (S.D. Cal.), aff’d , 470 F.2d 1367 (9th Cir. 1972). In many ways, an "aura of infallibility" accompanies polygraph test results, which "can lead jurors to abandon their duty to assess cr......
-
United States v. Marshall
...of proof and hearing arguments, the trial court denied the motion. Marshall contends that this was error. In United States v. De Betham, 470 F.2d 1367, 1368 (9th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 907, 93 S.Ct. 2299, 36 L.Ed.2d 972 (1973), we indicated that expert testimony relating to poly......
-
Com. v. Mendes
...rev'd per curiam, 475 F.2d 1280 (D.C.Cir.1972); United States v. DeBetham, 348 F.Supp. 1377, 1388 (S.D.Cal.), aff'd per curiam, 470 F.2d 1367 (9th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 907, 93 S.Ct. 2299, 36 L.Ed.2d 972 (1973). There now exists an American Polygraph Association which has develo......